Top Document: FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about CGI Programming Previous Document: 2.6 What is NPH? Next Document: 2.8 Do I have to call it nph-* See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge Generally, no. It is usually better to save yourself hassle by letting the HTTPD produce the headers for you. If you are going to use NPH, be sure to read and understand the HTTP spec at http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/ Your headers should be complete and accurate, because you're instructing the HTTPD not to correct them or insert what's missing. Possible circumstances where the use of NPH is appropriate are: * When your headers are sufficiently unusal that they might be differently parsed by different HTTPDs (eg combining "Location:" with a "Status:" other than 302). * When returning output over a period of time (eg displaying unbuffered results of a slow operation in 'real' time). See RFC1945 (HTTP/1.0) or RFC2068 (HTTP/1.1) for detail User Contributions:Top Document: FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about CGI Programming Previous Document: 2.6 What is NPH? Next Document: 2.8 Do I have to call it nph-* Single Page [ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:12 PM
|
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: